Tea Party

“It was never my intention to split the Republican vote.”

By Jay Newton-Small | @JNSmall | October 5, 2010 | +

Remember way back in October of 2009 — it feels like a million years ago to me — when Sarah Palin shocked the establishment by endorsing, on her facebook page, conservative Doug Hoffman over the GOP-chosen candidate Dede Scozzafava in the race to replace Rep. John McHugh? President Obama had picked McHugh, a Republican, to serve as Secretary of the Army. Hoffman charged Scozzafava for being too moderate and just days before the election she dropped out and threw her support behind Democrat Bill Owens. Owens won with 48% of the vote to Hoffman’s 46% and Scozzafava’s 6%. And thus launched a primary season defined by Tea Party versus Republican epic battles.

This year, a rematch looked likely in New York’s 23rd Congressional District. After losing a bruising primary to Republican Matt Doheny, Hoffman said he’d run as a conservative. He’d raised $2.2 million this cycle, most of which he blew on the primary, leaving Doheny with just $471,000 of the $1.8 million he raised to face Owens, who also raised $2.2 million and didn’t have a tough primary. But today, abruptly, Hoffman, a certified public accountant, withdrew from the race and threw his support behind Doheny, though it’s too late to take his name off the ballot. “Our nation is at a crossroads, and it is imperative that on Election Day we wrest control of Congress from Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat majority,” Hoffman said in a prepared statement. “It was never my intention to split the Republican vote.” Um, it seems just a tad belated for that sentiment, no?

Subscribe to Jay Newton-Small on Facebook
Related Topics: bill owens, dede scozzafava, doug hoffman, matt doheny, New York 23 congressional district, 2012 Election, Congress, Democratic Party, Nancy Pelosi, Republican Party, Sarah Palin, Tea Party

  • Latest on Swampland

    2012 Election May 25, 2012

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

    From our Partners

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Barack Obama May 25, 2012

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

  • groenhagen2

    “President Obama had picked McHugh, a Republican, to serve as Secretary of the Army and his district had been solidly Republican since the Civil War era.”

    That is not true. The NY 23 was represented by Democrats as late as the 1990s.

  • newfreedomblog

    It probably won’t matter Ms Newton-Small. Especially if this is the economic slide we are all on. It won’t really matter which party is in control over the next 2 years.
    .
    http://www.trendmacro.com/a/luskin/20101004luskinWSJ.asp
    .

    “Why won’t the Democrats who control both houses of Congress switch off this doomsday clock? It’s because Democratic leaders and the Obama administration want to roll the dice for the sake of ideology, by giving tax relief only to the middle class while letting rates rise for higher earners. A growing number of Democratic dissidents have joined with Republicans in insisting that, in this weak economy, it’s more prudent that relief be given to all Americans.
    .
    Some have even undergone a supply-side conversion. Forty-seven Democrats have sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi citing the urgency of preserving low tax rates on dividends and capital gains for the sake of more job-creating capital formation.”

  • http://www.twitter.com/jnsmall Jay Newton-Small

    My bad, I fixed. thanks.

  • newfreedomblog

    Since the 1856 election (when the Republican party entered the political arena), the territory in what is now NY-23 has almost exclusively been represented by the GOP. In fact, the last Democrat elected to represent St. Lawrence Co. in Congress was a man named Francis Spinner, elected in 1854. He ran successfully for re-election as a Republican in 1856 and was later appointed as Treasurer of the United States by Abraham Lincoln. The last Democrat to represent Jefferson Co. was even earlier – Willard Ives, elected in 1850. The most amazing fact I found was regarding Franklin Co. The last Democrat elected to represent that county was Joseph Russell, also in 1850. In 1852, the district that then included Franklin elected George Simmons, a member of the Whig party. Therefore, Franklin Co. has been more recently represented in Congress by a WHIG (1854) than by a Democrat (1852)!

    .
    http://www.swingstateproject.com/diary/5072/amazing-political-history-of-ny23
    .
    Perhaps Ms JNS would put in “most” of the district since the middle 1800′s.

  • textee

    Jay Newton-Small alleges: “Hoffman charged Scozzafava for being too moderate ….”

    Actually, Hoffman recognized (as did the rest of the pro-America community) that Scozzafava was not a “Republican” but was, in fact, a run-of-the-mill member of the Democrat party.

    Nice try, Newton-Small.

  • newfreedomblog

    What matters most. How much anger will translate into votes cast for anyone against Obama and his policies the Democrat Congress led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid rubber-stamped.
    .
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/05/fox-news-polls-gop-poised-gain-hold-senate-seats-key-states/
    .
    Even the old Byrd seat in West Virginia is now looking to be solidly in the Republican column. I’ll bet good ‘ol Robert Byrd is spinning in his new grave.

  • Ike Jakson

    So dear Jay

    What’s your gripe? You sound pleased about something but you aren’t getting to the point. Shame!

  • nflfoghorn

    “Pro-America?” Is there an Amateur-America???

  • http://liberalspin.wordpress.com darkskinned

    “Um, it seems just a tad belated for that sentiment, no?”

    .. I guess, the time will tell. You would like to believe that, wouldn’t you?

  • allthingsinaname

    “Pro-America?” Is there an Amateur-America???
    .
    LOL

  • destor23

    Funny language alert:

    “But today, abruptly, Hoffman, a certified public accountant, withdrew from the race…”

    That’s one of the funniest and most abrupt insertions of a story subject’s profession I’ve read in awhile. I could understand including it if he dropped out because he thought this year’s tax season was going to be especially lucrative but, come on!

    I also love it when journalists randomly insert somebody’s age for no reason.

  • grape_crush

    Um, it seems just a tad belated for that sentiment, no?

    Normally, causing the eventual winner of the primary to blow through all his cash before the general would prove you right, Jay.

    But now we are in new territory where the amount a candidate raises is less important than who the candidate’s corporate and big money sponsors are.

    Even if they can’t spend money directly on a candidate, there are ways that this ‘non-campaign advocacy’ can be used to influence an election…Not that we will easily be able to tell who is spending what amount.

  • newfreedomblog

    Maybe this is why we have seen so much negative postings by our illustrious TIME.com swamp-reporters and pundits.
    .
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/gallups-astonishing-numbers-and-the-lake-superior-congressional-districts-104321583.html
    .

    “it could be HISTORIC”!!!

    .

    Gallup also shows the results for two different turnout models. Under its “high turnout model” Republicans lead 53%-40%. Under its “low turnout model” Republicans lead 56%-38%.
    .
    These two numbers, if translated into popular votes in the 435 congressional districts, suggest huge gains for Republicans and a Republican House majority the likes of which we have not seen since the election cycles of 1946 or even 1928.
    .
    For months, people have been asking me if this year looks like ’94. My response is that the poll numbers suggest it looks like 1994, when Republicans gained 52 seats in a House of 435 seats. Or perhaps somewhat better for Republicans and worse for Democrats. The Gallup high turnout and low turnout numbers suggest it looks like 1894, when Republicans gained more than 100 seats in a House of approximately 350 seats.

    .
    Gee, TIME.com, when are you going to publish real news for a change and not just the fluff from the left you get as prepared garbage from the Democrat talking points?

  • http://forgottenlord.livejournal.com forgottenlord

    “It was never my intention to split the Republican vote, I honestly thought that doing the same thing twice would produce a different result”

  • northpoleresident

    If I am Obama I am practically pulling for Democrats to lose big in the mid terms. He is having hard enough time getting things passed with them in anyway and if they barely hang on to the majority he will have even less of a chance.

    If republicans take the majority then they will actually have to govern a little and work with the President. If they continue their government shutdown after obtaining all these seats then they will be helping Obama’s relection. The republicans are mostly belligerent modern klansmen but at least they are not spineless like the democrats are. The democrats are mostly cowards and have no real conviction. Obama sees this as well so he is really just going through the motions now of pushing support for the mid term races.

    It is not conicidence that democratic leaders who fully embrace the democratic agenda of health reform, climate change, and poverty are the ones still getting strong support. It is the wishy washy “blue dogs” and “centrists” who are losing the battle because the public, while dumb, can spot a phony when they see one.

  • perrywhite1

    I wish I could agree with this, northpole. But I don’t think the GOP has any intention of helping to govern. I suspect they will continue to be obstructionist through the next two years whether they control Congress or not, in the hopes of repeating their success of the last two years — making Obama look weak to low-information voters. It’s really their only hope of winning the White House in 2012, barring something unforeseen.
    .
    And if they get the House, they get subpoena power, and they’ll tie the White House up in frivolous investigations, as they did to Clinton. Rep. Issa has already vowed to do so, and claims to have a lengthy list already prepared.

  • http://buyaoqu.wordpress.com buyaoqu

    welcome to our website === w w w ( Lttsy ) – c o m === ..The new update, a large hot ..
    WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT.
    YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

blog comments powered by Disqus